Tom Remingtonhttp://tomremington.com
Tue, 31 Mar 2015 15:23:37 +0000en-UShourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.1Bear Lovers’ Undies Sure To Get Bunched Up Over This Moviehttp://tomremington.com/2015/03/31/bear-lovers-undies-sure-to-get-bunched-up-over-this-movie/
http://tomremington.com/2015/03/31/bear-lovers-undies-sure-to-get-bunched-up-over-this-movie/#commentsTue, 31 Mar 2015 15:20:18 +0000http://tomremington.com/?p=24283Field and Stream is reporting about a “wilderness survival thriller” movie based on a true story of a man and a woman who become victims of a black bear attack.But, but, but……there’s never been a black bear attack on humans before….I thought…or maybe not so much?

The idea that cute and cuddly black bears are portrayed as they really can be is sure to bunch a bunch of fudged undies.

I recently changed dentists and last week had my first appointment. The dentist asked me if I was the same person who writes about wolves in the Wisconsin Outdoor News. I said, yes, I am, and he proceeded to tell me how much he hates wolves and how frustrated he is with wolf-lovers. He said that he and friends had deer hunted in northern Wisconsin for years but they recently started hunting in central Wisconsin because the wolves have decimated the northern deer population (this confirms what I have heard and read from other sources). He said that the motel (Comfort Inn) where they stayed when deer hunting in the north was always full during deer season but now is down to 20% capacity due to the lack of hunters. He also said that another group of friends who traditionally hunted in a national forest in the north have not seen a single deer in the past five years.

The dentist told of an incident with a wolf when he was bird hunting with his dog. The wolf charged his dog and he shot the wolf at point-blank range. Fortunately for his dog, he was close enough to defend it from the wolf. This incident took place before wolves were put back on protected status.

Nothing like a real encounter to convince one of lethal wolf behavior.

XXXX

————————————————————–
XXXX,

Clearly, the N Wisconsin deer herd is seeking its “New Normal”, wherein global warming and climate change effects on plants; and those as yet unspecified diseases, fleas and ticks that Minnesota DNR “biologists” and University of Minnesota “perfessers” have yet to identify but are sure are causing the demise of N Minnesota deer and moose are spreading to our Eastern neighbors. All we can do in the meantime is give them more money and just hope they find the answers in time. Otherwise, soon the Central Wisconsin deer herd will similarly disappear as far as any hunting and what is left, Illinois???

Actually, a few more years of this lying and subterfuge from all these government experts and the possible political reaction from Wisconsin progressives that aren’t still hiding in Illinois and Indiana motels will give the Madison/Milwaukee/U of W wolf folks control of the State government (like Anthony Eden and Labour replaced Winston Churchill and the Conservatives in 1945 as soon as the War was over) and with Wisconsin deer hunters historical anomalies (like loggers and trappers); and rural Wisconsin dog owners filing out of the woods with their hands over their heads crying, “Comrade” like Italians surrendering in N Africa in 1942 or Germans surrendering at Stalingrad in 1943 – they can:

– Make the wolf the State Icon, State Mammal, State Predator, and place a 30’ high statue of a wolf in the Capitol Rotunda.

– Make dog ownership illegal since the opposition from remaining rural dog owners (those that actually derive other than emotional benefits from their dogs) will be about the size of the Hmong lobby.

– Revoke Concealed Carry and make the possession of rifles, shotguns and ammunition illegal without a permit issued by some young lady in Madison since deer hunters and rural residents that actually imagine hunting or defending themselves and their property from wolves and human predators will be moving to cities and leaving the rural precincts to federal and state realtors who will help the Local governments box up their records for the State Archivist and the State Historian since Local government revenue will dry up like speakeasies in 1933.

– Seize the fish and game agency revenues and authority for:

– “Protection” and “research” of all plant and animal species (not just the “hook and bullet” species).

– Extermination of all “NON-Native” plants and animals not documented as occurring in the State before 1492 AD.

– Restoration of all “Native” (as defined in Legislation) species of plants and animals throughout the state.

– When the old hunting and fishing revenue runs out quickly since there is no more hunting and fishing, the State Legislature and the US Congress will receive demands from the urban voters to spend tax dollars from all to make the State a Secular Nature Worship Cathedral as a model for other progressives elsewhere or else who will employ all those DNR worthies and “perfessers” that caused all this without a scintilla of responsibility or one qualm of a guilty conscience.

This sarcasm has more than a kernel of truth in it. I am saddened as I hear about your deer hunters as I hear about similar situations across this great country almost every day and, as they say, if you didn’t laugh you would have to cry once you understand what is happening.

————————————————-

Jim: There was a recent letter to the editor in WON written by a bird hunter/bird dog owner in NE WI. He complained to the DNR folks that he can’t/won’t bird hunt because the presence of wolves is too much of a threat to the safety of his dogs. So the ever-adaptive DNR told him to hunt in areas where there are fewer or no wolves (the DNR handily has a map of wolf territories on its website). The hunter pointed out two distinct and DNR-ignored facts: Wolves traverse a large territory and the packs are not always where the DNR says they should be, and, this DNR “advice” has effectively made areas of WI no-hunting zones. So here we go – exactly what the U.S. Humane Society wants – the death of hunting.

XXXX
—————————————————————

XXXX,

When I moved back to Minnesota 6 years ago, the St. Paul Pioneer Press was publishing unbelievable DNR/U of M drivel about wolves bi-weekly with front page stuff every few months about moose, and how ticks and global warming (I kid you not) were responsible for the disappearance of moose. Almost without fail, wolves were never mentioned and when mentioned they were just a throwaway reference to some people saying that predation was a factor. Those that were so noted were usually pictured as redneck, flat-earthers that were too dumb to accept global warming and were probably racists on top of it.

I wrote letter to the editor after letter to the editor trying in a few words and in measured tones (to get it accepted as a letter) to point out the lies in the articles but to no avail.

So I wrote the Outdoor Writer about it and tried to send him information but he dismissed me like a petulant child that didn’t like spinach.

My last e-mail to him concerned how in the short time (2 years?) since I returned I had met two Minnesota ruffed grouse hunters (one at Church and one while fishing in central Minnesota) that told me they no longer hunted grouse because they had had encounters with wolves that they drove off with their shotguns. Both said they hunted with the family dog and if they ever brought the dog home dead or all chewed up they didn’t think grouse were worth the reaction from their wives or kids. The outdoor writer said I was just making it up. He had lived in Minnesota all his life and never heard of such nonsense. He asked me to quit bothering him. About 6 months later he went to work as a Public Relations flak for the Minnesota DNR where so far as I know he labors away today.

His replacement was a young, urban enviro whose claim to fame, per himself, was he hadn’t hunted or fished before but he loved nature. He took up where his predecessor left off. I kept writing letters to the editor and when the outdoor guy wrote drivel about wolves I wrote him a measured e-mail which he quickly dismissed me with the words, we would just have to agree to disagree. He replied also that I was nuts for implying that I knew it was hard for him to be objective about such things and still maintain the DNR as a story source for articles or as a recommendation for keeping his job if he was too far off the wolf, et al, reservation. He clearly expected to hear from that old crank that had just moved to the state and was just a waste of time if you didn’t turn him off right away.

You are absolutely right about the perfidy of wolf “maps”: they are just like wolf depredation “compensation” that never materializes either fully or for an extended period. They are both placebos administered for temporary gain by neophytes that couldn’t even qualify as midwifes, and whose hidden agendas are despicable and responsible for much of the ongoing loss of rural American culture, communities, government and economies.

Jim Beers
28 March 2015

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others. Thanks.
Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC. He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands. He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC. He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority. He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.
Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting. You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to: jimbeers7@comcast.net

]]>http://tomremington.com/2015/03/30/milts-corner-florida-panther/feed/0How Long Can a University Go?http://tomremington.com/2015/03/30/how-long-can-a-university-go/
http://tomremington.com/2015/03/30/how-long-can-a-university-go/#commentsMon, 30 Mar 2015 12:57:59 +0000http://tomremington.com/?p=24267By James Beers

Cornell U – From University to Disgraceful Nursery for Radicals

The first (#1) article below is a current report of Cornell University’s latest and most shameful bid for notoriety. It is self–explanatory. Anyone sending any children to this disgraceful den of academic iniquity masquerading as a center of “learning” should seriously reconsider such action.

This is not the first time I have encountered this University. The second (#2) article below was written by me last fall and it mentions Cornell’s recent deer sterilization fiasco that is followed by another news report of “Cornellian” wildlife buffoonery. In my article about the deer I recall a previous encounter 10 years ago with Cornell graduates and professors regarding their disgraceful participation in the US Fish and Wildlife Service’s clandestine request for and expenditure of $14 million dollars to “find” Ivory-billed Woodpeckers that had and have been extinct in the USA for over 70 years. The certainly extinct (there are lots of folks in the Southern US woodlands that would have mentioned seeing or hearing these very large woodpeckers despite their lack of University credentials from Cornell) Ivory-bills were merely surrogates for other agendas:

* Ivory bills, per historic reports, “look like pintail ducks” as they fly through and near Southern woodlands. Thus if you were a Southern duck hunter, what do you think USFWS and all their enviro/animal rights partners had in mind for duck hunting?

* Ivory-bills were historically found in wooded swamps from North Carolina to Texas. So as this erstwhile environmental posse of federal bureaucrats and the Cornell worthies were seeking the long-lost Ivory-bills in these wooded southern swamps; they delineated, purchased and took easements on available remaining Southern woodlands in case any Ivory-bills were found and were in need of new and expansive habi –tat/tats (a humorous woodpecker play on words). Federal ownership and control plus justifications for future federal actions “just in case” while certainly in “our” best interests; did not bode well for Local communities, local government and local residents living in or near these new federal environmental target areas.

So relax and read about the descent of a once respected University; but even more importantly think about how ANY institution that is insinuated into the environmental radical movement can get twisted into lies, fantasies, righteousness, buffoonery, and corruption about their perverted view of “nature”; and then finally find itself enabling treasonous actions with all the self-assurance of some Islamic State executioner, that was once an American or British college student, executing captives horrifically on “Social media” simply because they are Christians or their parents couldn’t come up with millions in a couple of days.

Cornell, ”we hardly knew ye”. (Paraphrased from an old Irish song.)

Jim Beers
25 March 2015

#1.
CAMPUS WELCOMES TERRORISTS: Cornell Dean Is Cool With ISIS Club On Campus [VIDEO]
Posted on March 25, 2015
This administrator at Cornell University thinks it’d be a great idea to start an ISIS club and bring in an ISIS member to speak, among other things.

In the latest undercover sting operation from investigative filmmaker James O’Keefe, an assistant dean at Cornell University has advised a journalist posing as a Moroccan student all about how to launch a campus club with the express intent of supporting ISIS.

The Ivy League administrator, Joseph Scaffido, also provides counsel on how to fund the pro-Islamist militant club so it can send “care packages, whether it be food, water, electronics” to ISIS and Hamas — both terrorist organizations, according to the State Department.
Read more: The Daily Caller

#2.
Wildlife “Science”- From Human Benefit to Buffoonery

Fifty-five years ago when I was searching for the best University wildlife biology School I could afford, Cornel’ was right near the top of high quality education schools and right near the bottom (actually not even on the list) of the list of schools I could afford. I chose Utah State University and have never regretted that decision for a moment. Thank you, Utah, for making that school available for me in those years. But back to Cornell.

Over the years, I met numerous Cornell graduates and found them to generally (I know I am stereotyping here) exude attitudes of superiority commonly seen in many Harvard and MIT graduates I have met.

During the 1980’s and 1990’s, Cornell research and notoriety in the wildlife area steadily mimicked the U of Wisconsin and Berkley publications and reports touting environmental extremism and animal rights nonsense. By the time of my retirement I no longer gave Cornell any thought other than to dismiss what they published or reports about what they were doing.

In 2005, five years after my retirement, I once again encountered Cornell and was astonished at how “far off the tracks” their snobbery and integration with federal bureaucrats had taken them. It seems the USFWS had obtained a “secret” fund of millions of dollars from Congress to “find and document” remaining Ivory-billed Woodpeckers that had recently been seen by “reliable” Southern birdwatchers. It was “secret” (oh how bureaucrats and politicians love such harmless intrigue as they seek to perfect our world in spite of our ignorance and stubbornness) because there was a chance that some ignorant redneck might find and destroy the “last” Ivory-billed Woodpecker (they are still extinct for over 75 years as I write) before federal protection and force could “save” them. Cornell was part of the (publicly-funded but ”secret”) “search and save” expeditions all over the South where their guesses as to where these “ancient” birds that “looked like pintails” (take note Southern woodland duck hunters) as they flew through southern swamps might find suitable habitat for planned federal woodpecker enhancements. Land was bought, land was eased and wooded wetland owners from N. Carolina and Florida to E. Texas were warned that they might one day harbor federally-designated Critical Habitat (yikes) for a bird once thought to be extinct!

When I wrote about this lunacy (if no hunter, trapper, farmer, or rural resident had seen or reported a “giant” woodpecker in 60+ years, the likelihood of federal bureaucrats or Cornell worthies finding even one were nil) I happened to mention how old-timers said the best habitat and draw for those big woodpeckers was a stand of trees purposely girdled and dying as swamps were being cleared for drainage and eventual farming. These trees were infested with insects in and under the bark (thereby drawing in lots of all sorts of woodpeckers from far and wide). I suggested (tongue-in-cheek) they try this old trick to see if there were any Ivory-bills in the neighborhood.

What I got in return from an Ivory-billed Woodpecker “Team Leader” who if memory serves was some sort of Cornell Grad student or Assistant Wildlife Professor was one of the nastier e-mails I ever received and that is saying something. The one “academic and scientific” comment I remember to this day from this person was something to the effect that if I “and my pig-farmer buddies” (oooohhh!) wanted to ruin the world he and science would stop us.

It has been 9 years since that little contretemps with Cornell. This morning, the following news report (below) about Cornell, their campus and deer crossed my desk. Read it and enjoy the humor but consider the sadness of a once great wildlife school and how far it has fallen. It is as if an award winning actor like Laurence Olivier had taken to drink and late one Saturday night years later you turn on the TV and there he is stumbling through a Saturday Night Live skit mumbling his lines to the great amusement of the audience.

Cornell displays the fruits of environmental extremism and animal rights radicalism, and where they lead those that fall for their false values and agenda.

Jim Beers
21 October 2014

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others. Thanks.
Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC. He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands. He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC. He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority. He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.
Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting. You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to: jimbeers7@comcast.net

]]>http://tomremington.com/2015/03/30/how-long-can-a-university-go/feed/2Fish and Game Hypocrisy Over Commenting on Issues?http://tomremington.com/2015/03/30/fish-and-game-hypocrisy-over-commenting-on-issues/
http://tomremington.com/2015/03/30/fish-and-game-hypocrisy-over-commenting-on-issues/#respondMon, 30 Mar 2015 12:37:55 +0000http://tomremington.com/?p=24265Back on March 19, 2015, a Maine guide wrote an editorial about the decision by the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) to issue a certain number of cow moose permits for a Wildlife Management District (WMD) near Greenville. The writer believes that there are not enough moose in this region to justify the number of permits. There is a system in place that allows for public comment on this issue.

In this editorial, it states that in a telephone interview with Judy Camuso, wildlife division director of MDIFW, “Our rules don’t allow for us [to comment] because the public comment period is still open,” Camuso said. “We don’t want to sway people’s comments.”

In a subsequent editorial response, a writer claims that there exists hypocrisy with MDIFW because the department was very outspoken during the recent bear referendum but MDIFW claims it is against the rules to offer public comments while the comment period for that issue is still open.

One might understand, to a degree, the issue about following rules, however, it would appear that the rules for one issue do stand hypocritical to the rules of another issue. The argument can be made that MDIFW has already made their statement about the issuance of cow moose permits by the act of issuing the number of permits they did. They obviously must support the action and was approved by the department.

However, this action would seem to support the argument made by those opposing the department to be able to participate in referendum campaigns when they say that the MDIFW should be able to make a statement only and that public participation in other campaigning programs should be disallowed.

Even though the issues are different, i.e. one a referendum, the other a permit allocation management decision, there does seem to be a bit of unexplained hypocrisy going on here. If the rules prohibit the discussion of an issue “while the comment period is still open” in fear of “sway[ing] people’s comments” then this rule needs to be changed. Can comments be effectively and honestly made if information and explanations are being squelched?

Some, of course want to change the law, to prohibit or censor MDIFW from participating in referendum campaigns beyond the issuance of a statement of position. I disagree with that approach. The state of Maine created a department for the purpose of managing game and other wildlife. While I am not a blind supporter of all things MDIFW, voters do rely on the department to offer the facts and data that they use to make decisions. Those same facts and data must be made transparent and available to all taxpayers.

Having said that, it would only seem the right thing to allow MDIFW to discuss with anyone who questions decisions at all times and not just relegated to an obscure and not very “public” public comment period.

The people are entitled to information. That information cannot be gotten through government and totalitarian censorship. Let the facts speak for themselves and thus let the facts be well seen and heard.